4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Gender differences in sepsis: Genetically determined?

Journal

SHOCK
Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages 307-310

Publisher

BIOMEDICAL PRESS
DOI: 10.1097/00024382-200014030-00011

Keywords

sepsis; gender; men; women; surgery; tumor necrosis factor; polymorphism

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the pathogenesis of sepsis, tumor necrosis factor (TNF) release and host reaction may be genetically determined as demonstrated for TNF beta Ncol polymorphism. Gender differences are considered as another important prognostic variable in patients with sepsis with better survival for women. The effect of sexual dimorphism on the genetic background of sepsis, however, is unknown. In a prospective study at two university hospital surgical intensive care units, (Bonn and Kiel), the role of the genomic marker TNF beta Ncol polymorphism was evaluated with respect to gender. Two-hundred and one patients (68 women and 133 men) with severe sepsis were evaluated. A fragment of genomic DNA including the polymorphic site of the restriction enzyme Ncol was amplified by means of polymerase chain reaction. The genotype of each patient was determined after Ncol digestion of the amplified product. The genotype distribution of patients homozygous for TNFB1, heterozygous or homozygous for TNFB2 was comparable between men and women with severe sepsis. In women, no difference in survival rate was found between the different genotypes, while mortality rate was significantly increased in men homozygous for TNFB2 compared with the other genotypes (P < 0.05; P < 0.01, X-2 test). Overall, survival rate was higher for women (P < 0.05) but was not significantly different between men and women with respect to genotypes (P = 0.07 for TNFB2/B2). Poor prognosis of surgical sepsis can be determined by male gender and the genomic marker TNF Ncol polymorphism which should be considered for further therapeutic interventions in sepsis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available